The battle for Atlantis

by resist, I do not just mean by citing local laws against federal interference, but also – if all else fails – by using firearms. Everyone who is serious about defending a sanctuary city must start by owning and being competent in operating firearms. Don’t come complaining to us when legislative countermeasures are not enough; we have already stated what needs to be done. Federal laws on their own do not magically deport people; all it takes is for people to choose to stay put. To drag someone from their home is a physical action; the last line of defence against it is also necessarily physical. If Rehabs must risk their lives each time they enter their intended victims’ home to drag them from it, will they really be willing to do it millions of times over?

While the results hold true across sanctuary jurisdictions, the sanctuary counties with the smallest populations see the most pronounced effects.

Altogether, the data suggest that when local law enforcement focuses on keeping communities safe, rather than becoming entangled in federal immigration enforcement efforts, communities are safer and community members stay more engaged in the local economy. This in turn brings benefits to individual households, communities, counties, and the economy as a whole.

What this should imply is that sanctuary counties on average pay more in taxes than non-sanctuary counties. Therefore, if Trump is going to attack sanctuary policy by cutting federal funding, those affected could respond by ceasing to pay federal taxes, and conceivably end up financially better off than before. Why should sanctuary taxpayers continue to pay federal taxes anyway, when they will no longer allocated federal funds in return (and instead their tax money will apparently be spent on building Trump’s wall)?

In fact, Americans in general who did not vote for Trump (who campaigned on the promise of building a wall) would be entirely justified if they refused to pay federal taxes for the wall. The only people who have any reason to be paying for the wall are the Trump voters, since they are the ones who want it built.

If this message of refusing (with local government endorsement) to pay federal taxes can spread, it will provide positive incentive for more locations throughout the US to declare themselves sanctuaries also, thus bringing about the exact opposite of the disincentive that federal defunding was intended to be. Indeed, the money saved from federal taxes could be paid into a pan-sanctuary foundation instead! This would enable sanctuaries in need of extra money to be aided by sanctuaries with money to spare, strengthening the entire pan-sanctuary economy. We should even explore the possibility of establishing a pan-sanctuary currency as an alternative to US dollars!

In response to Lucius’ concern about Trump’s travel ban, I propose the incredibly simple solution of sanctuary airports! If individual airports simply choose to let through customs those people with passports from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen irrespective of whether or not Trump thinks they should be allowed in, is Trump going to drop bombs on these airports? PACPO needs to start contacting every international airport in the US, especially those located in sanctuary cities, petitioning them to take this heroic step, which in fact is nothing more than to just keep doing what they were already doing before Trump’s executive order was issued). Sanctuary airports should be presented as the 21st century version of the 19th century Underground Railroad:

(In the meantime, another way people from Trump’s banned countries can get into the US is simply to fly to Canada and then walk across the US-Canada border. Let’s see Trump try to build a wall along the length of the US’s northern border too!)

It doesn’t stop here. PACPO should be thinking about what other sanctuary institutions are needed, and proposing all of them in detail to the people on the ground who can choose to implement these ideas. And, I repeat one more time, every sanctuary must be defended from the Rehabs with firearms. Not protest signs, not chants, not sit-ins, but FIREARMS (ideally sniper rifles and DMRs, though any rifles will do). When I spoke of ressurecting Atlantis, I was being totally serious, and this is how you do it.

47 Responses to The battle for Atlantis

All of you talk as if you were the masters of the world. But I can be tribalist or any thing what I like, why? Because all of you are nobody, none is interested in your ideology except this 4 poor boys who comment here, and this ‘Arysnism’ never can go to power.

The Union Jackers (another name for New Hollanders) are on board with the Trumpers. Of course, Julie is also the one who gave Netanyahu a warm invitation to come visit us downunder… By the way, I really am inspired by your strategies as far as supporting the Sanctuary Movement.

Please do. We would not want you to pretend to be better than what you are.

“4 poor boys”

You trolls need to make up your minds. Other trolls have claimed that we are funded by George Soros. So which is it?

_____

The fight is on:

Massive crowds packed Boston’s Copley Square, Battery Park in New York City and outside the White House, with demonstrations at airports from coast to coast to protest the order
…
Thousands of attorneys have turned out en masse across the country, they said, including more than 4,000 people who signed up to help with the IRAP and many more showing up own their own, too. The executive director of the National Immigration Law Center said about 2,000 lawyers had formed a group dedicated to providing support on a regular basis.

Federal judges in three states followed one in New York in barring authorities from deporting travelers affected by U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order imposing restrictions on immigration from seven Muslim-majority nations.
…
In Boston, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs on Sunday issued a temporary restraining order blocking the removal of two Iranians who taught at the University of Massachusetts who had been detained at Logan International Airport. The order, set to last seven days, appeared to go further than Donnelly’s by barring officials from detaining, in addition to removing, approved refugees, visa holders and permanent U.S. residents from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Sudan, Somalia and Yemen. Donnelly’s order only forbade removing those affected by Trump’s order.

The legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, Matthew Segal, in a statement called Burroughs’ order “a huge victory for justice. We told President Trump we would see him in court if he ordered this unconstitutional ban on Muslims,” Segal said. “He tried, and federal courts in Boston and throughout the nation stopped it in its tracks.”

In Alexandria, Virginia, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema on Saturday night barred the Department of Homeland Security from removing 50 to 60 people detained at Dulles International Airport who are legal permanent residents. Dulles is one of the main airports serving Washington, D.C.

Brinkema’s temporary restraining order also requires the agency to allow those individuals to speak with lawyers, according to the Legal Aid and Justice Center in Virginia, which provides representation to low-income individuals.

On the West Coast, U.S. District Judge Thomas Zilly in Seattle on Saturday barred the federal government from removing two unnamed individuals. He scheduled a further hearing on the issue for Feb. 3.

We don’t support Islam, guess you haven’t read the site. No surprise there really. Mohammed was no pedophile. He had many wives, many older than he himself. So obviously he wasn’t interested in ‘ageism’ as you are, but love of the individual for their personality.

Catholicism is a false religion started by a Jew! What is your point? Even though I don’t agree with the Islam of today, I’d much rather be a Muslim than a Catholic…

We call Mohammed’s religion Mohammedanism and consider merely following the rules of Islam insufficient to make one a true Mohammedan, which is I think what you were thinking of when you wrote your line(?), but among POLITICAL systems we rank Islam above fascism and below (duh!) National Socialism, which is far from a low rank…..

In any conflict between Islam and democracy, we support Islam. Only in cases where Islam goes against another form of autocracy do we need to think more carefully about which side to support. And even then we support Islam in many cases; for example, we agree with Hitler about wishing Charles Martel had lost at Poitiers and about Andalus being the best period in Spanish history.

I will also post for the third time Savitri Devi’s defence of Islam in India because it is so well-written:

“Any man who believes in the “avatar” Sri Chaitanya is a Vaishnava, religiously speaking; but it would be difficult to persuade an Indian Vaishnava to always treat that man socially as his brother, whoever he may be; the example of Sri Chaitanya himself is not constantly eloquent enough for modern Haridases to be welcomed in numbers. Caste mentality has reconquered the Vaishnavas. The Mohammedan converts and their descendants seem to be the only ones in India (and perhaps in the world) to have thoroughly shaken it off. Any man who has accepted the message of Islam is a Mohammedan and treated as such, always and everywhere, religiously and socially, by his Mohammedan brothers.
…
The two great strongholds of Mohammedan power nowadays, Punjab and Bengal, were the great centres of Indian Buddhism, once; Afghanistan was too, so was the “North-Western Frontier Province,” with Purushapur (Peshwar) and Taxila, famous seats of Buddhist culture. It seems that wherever there is, now, on Indian soil, a large Mohammedan population, there was, formerly, a large Buddhist population. The very dress which characterises the Bengali Mohammedans, — the coloured “lunghi,” — is the dress of Burma and of Java, a Buddhist dress. There is a reason behind this: all these Mohammedans’ ancestors were converts from Buddhism. And it is mainly if not solely the Hindus’ fault if they have become converts. One example will show what we mean.
…
When the Mohammedans actually came, the Buddhists had to side either with the Hindus or with them. We proclaim in the Hindu Mahasabha meetings, (now we have learnt what unity is worth) that every Indian Buddhist, or even every Buddhist at large, is a Hindu. But the Sens did not think so. Nor did the few Hindus of Bengal, in their days. So that “to side with the Hindus” was not so easy for a Bengali Buddhist then as it is for us to criticise him now. The Greek Christians of Byzantium did not suffer at the hands of the Latin Christians what the Bengali Buddhists did at the hands of the Hindus; for theirs were religious and political grievances, not social ones. And yet, we know that when the Latins offered their help to the Greeks against the besieging Turks on the condition they would accept the Latin Church’s claims, the Greeks, about to lose their existence as a nation, answered with one voice “Better Mohamed’s turban than the Pope’s tiara.” The Buddhists of Bengal thought: “Better the savage Afghans than the refined Hindus with their caste system.” Any of us would have thought the same in their place. Persecuted from both sides, it was very difficult for Bengali Buddhism to continue flourishing. And of two societies, the one which offers the greatest opportunities to rise seems the best to the eyes of downtrodden people. Side with the Hindus? Why? To be treated as untouchables? To remain, whatever they do, frustrated of the privileges of caste citizenship? Not worthwhile. It was easier and more profitable to become the brothers of the savage Afghans; and so they did.
…
had we so-called Indian nationalists, treated our Musulman brothers as Indians during even these last fifty years; had we given them the opportunity to know us, to appreciate us, to work with us; had we taught them that our past, our culture, our India are theirs no less than ours, and given them every opportunity of personal development on national lines, along with ourselves, then, we would not have now to fight against any Communal Award, or Pakistan scheme; we would not need a Hindu Mahasabha. It serves us right.” – Savitri Devi

I suggest we support Trump… This Muslim Ban is actually the best thing for the Muslims and for the destruction of the United States too… If we want the West to die, we need to get behind these far right idiots and let them destroy themselves…

“California could very well become an organized non-payer,” said Willie Brown, Jr, a former speaker of the state Assembly in an interview recorded Friday for KPIX 5’s Sunday morning news. “They could recommend non-compliance with the federal tax code.”

California is among a handful of so-called “donor states,” which pay more in taxes to the federal Treasury than they receive in government funding

the key issues are trust and loyalty. By having subordinates tell lies on his behalf, Trump accomplishes two things:
One is that it’s a test — “if you want to ascertain if someone is truly loyal to you, ask them to do something outrageous or stupid.”
The other is that it’s a rite of passage — “by requiring subordinates to speak untruths, a leader can undercut their independent standing, including their standing with the public, with the media and with other members of the administration.”
Both of these things allow Trump to do a better job of operating in a low-trust environment. Any Republican who is willing to publicly echo Trump’s lies does two things. One is that he proves he is willing to incur costs to his personal reputation in order to defend Trump. The other is that having in fact borne costs to his personal reputation, he objectively ties up his success with Trump’s.

Last night, on French news, there was a report on secret, illegal islamist primary schools – little girls in hijabs, teachers in full covering (niqabs – I think), gender segregation, 10 hours a week koranic indoctrination, the teaching of the hatred Of France and French values, children not allowed outside in case they were ‘spotted’ – all done in derelict and semi-derelict buildings. That’s sad, freaky and outraging, all at once.

“little girls in hijabs, teachers in full covering (niqabs – I think),”

Other schools in France ban headscarves. Either each school is allowed to set its own dress code, or students and teachers should be allowed to wear whatever they want in all schools.

“gender segregation”

Gender-segregated schools are a common phenomenon irrespective of religion, so I have no idea why you even mention this.

“10 hours a week koranic indoctrination”

Mainstream schools in non-Western countries easily spend 30+ hours a week teaching a Western curriculum, and people do not call it Western indoctrination. This is the double-standard that we despise.

“all done in derelict and semi-derelict buildings.”

I have always respected frugality. It is a big part of why I positively appreciate the municipal aesthetics typical of so-called “Third World” countries, the same type of aesthetics that are becoming increasingly rare in richer countries obsessed with “development” and especially “gentrification”.

“the teaching of the hatred Of France and French values”

This is what we think of French values:

“What we call chauvinistic education – in the case of the French people, for example – is only the excessive exaltation of the greatness of France in all spheres of culture or, as the French say, civilization. The French boy is not educated on purely objective principles. Wherever the importance of the political and cultural greatness of his country is concerned he is taught in the most subjective way that one can imagine.” – Adolf Hitler

“The only form which English negotiations could take was that of participating in France’s lust for aggrandizement.” – Adolf Hitler

“What got still more on my nerves was the repugnant manner in which the big newspapers cultivated admiration for France. One really had to feel ashamed of being a German when confronted by those mellifluous hymns of praise for ‘the great culture-nation’. This wretched Gallomania more often than once made me throw away one of those ‘world newspapers’.” – Adolf Hitler

“Finally, we must be quite clear on the following point: France is and will remain the implacable enemy of Germany. It does not matter what Governments have ruled or will rule in France, whether Bourbon or Jacobin, Napoleonic or Bourgeois-Democratic, Clerical Republican or Red Bolshevik.” – Adolf Hitler

“I shall never believe that France will of herself alter her intentions towards us, because, in the last analysis, they are only the expression of the French instinct for self-preservation.” – Adolf Hitler

Hitler, as always, included positivity in his thinking:

“Once when I was travelling to Florence, I thought, as I passed through it, what a paradise this land of southern France is!” – Adolf Hitler

“There must be two Frances.” – Adolf Hitler

This is why we support Occitania as opposed to what we call Carolingian France. We see Occitania as being intuitively closer to the Mediterranean cultures than to Carolingian French culture.

“One day there was a dramatic incident! A foreign statesman passing through Berlin paid François-Poncet a visit. It was the hour when children were leaving school. The children rushed into the drawing-room, shouting “Heil Hitler!” When he told me the story, Poncet appealed to me: “It was very embarrassing for me. Put yourself in my place!” Soon afterwards, François-Poncet went to Paris, and returned to Berlin without his children. I asked him if his children weren’t happy in Berlin. “Young people are easily influenced,” he said. “Just think, my children don’t know who is the President of the Republic. I’m aghast! The other day we were passing by a monument in Paris and suddenly they exclaimed : ‘Look, daddy, there’s Bismarck!’ I decided to send them to a good school in France.”" – Adolf Hitler

“In fact, Americans in general who did not vote for Trump (who campaigned on the promise of building a wall) would be entirely justified if they refused to pay federal taxes for the wall.”

Thoreau advocated a similar stance in his essay ‘Civil Disobedience’ (and was eventually jailed for refusing to pay taxes).

“If you are cheated out of a single dollar by your neighbor, you do not rest satisfied with knowing that you are cheated, or with saying that you are cheated, or even with petitioning him to pay you your due; but you take effectual steps at once to obtain the full amount, and see that you are never cheated again. Action from principle, the perception and the performance of right, changes things and relations; it is essentially revolutionary, and does not consist wholly with anything which was. It not only divides States and churches, it divides families; ay, it divides the individual, separating the diabolical in him from the divine.

Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men generally, under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to be on the alert to point out its faults, and do better than it would have them? Why does it always crucify Christ, and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther, and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels?
…
Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and slavery, the State will not hesitate which to choose. If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible. If the tax-gatherer, or any other public officer, asks me, as one has done, “But what shall I do?” my answer is, “If you really wish to do anything, resign your office.” When the subject has refused allegiance, and the officer has resigned his office, then the revolution is accomplished. But even suppose blood should flow. Is there not a sort of blood shed when the conscience is wounded? Through this wound a man’s real manhood and immortality flow out, and he bleeds to an everlasting death. I see this blood flowing now.
…
When I came out of prison- for some one interfered, and paid that tax- I did not perceive that great changes had taken place on the common, such as he observed who went in a youth and emerged a tottering and gray-headed man; and yet a change had to my eyes come over the scene- the town, and State, and country- greater than any that mere time could effect. I saw yet more distinctly the State in which I lived. I saw to what extent the people among whom I lived could be trusted as good neighbors and friends; that their friendship was for summer weather only; that they did not greatly propose to do right; that they were a distinct race from me by their prejudices and superstitions”

Republicans have often whined that their states should refuse to pay federal taxes because they don’t want to pay for federal social services such as healthcare (but of course, nothing much has come of this, except hot air). It would be quite impressive if left-leaning states were the ones who succeeded in withholding taxes!

—-

Bonus from Thoreau:

“But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.

After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases cannot be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?- in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislation? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right.
…
Practically speaking, the opponents to a reform in Massachusetts are not a hundred thousand politicians at the South, but a hundred thousand merchants and farmers here, who are more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity, and are not prepared to do justice to the slave and to Mexico, cost what it may. I quarrel not with far-off foes, but with those who, near at home, cooperate with, and do the bidding of those far away, and without whom the latter would be harmless. We are accustomed to say, that the mass of men are unprepared; but improvement is slow, because the few are not materially wiser or better than the many. It is not so important that many should be as good as you, as that there be some absolute goodness somewhere; for that will leaven the whole lump. There are thousands who are in opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them; who, esteeming themselves children of Washington and Franklin, sit down with their hands in their pockets, and say that they know not what to do, and do nothing; who even postpone the question of freedom to the question of free trade, and quietly read the prices-current along with the latest advices from Mexico, after dinner, and, it may be, fall asleep over them both. What is the price-current of an honest man and patriot today? They hesitate, and they regret, and sometimes they petition; but they do nothing in earnest and with effect. They will wait, well disposed, for others to remedy the evil, that they may no longer have it to regret. At most, they give only a cheap vote, and a feeble countenance and God-speed, to the right, as it goes by them. There are nine hundred and ninety-nine patrons of virtue to one virtuous man. But it is easier to deal with the real possessor of a thing than with the temporary guardian of it.

All voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong, with moral questions; and betting naturally accompanies it. The character of the voters is not staked. I cast my vote, perchance, as I think right; but I am not vitally concerned that that right should prevail. I am willing to leave it to the majority. Its obligation, therefore, never exceeds that of expediency. Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should prevail. A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men. When the majority shall at length vote for the abolition of slavery, it will be because they are indifferent to slavery, or because there is but little slavery left to be abolished by their vote. They will then be the only slaves. Only his vote can hasten the abolition of slavery who asserts his own freedom by his vote.”

@Pandorastop – At this point I am actually more inclined to believe that those who are willing to stick things out in their homelands in spite of basically being turned into war zones by the West could be more likely individually to have more propensity towards nobility and idealism, as opposed to those who flee to a more comfortable and materialistic life in the Western nations. This is why I was considering that the United States which at this point seems to epitomise the materialistic, secular way of life, banning Muslims entry to their country, could actually act in our favour as far as encouraging nobility and quality.

@Pandorastop – Right, so I don’t see the United States in its current state as being the right kind of environment to encourage quality. And in shaa Allah, I believe if the Khalifate in truth (not the ISIS phony, nor the Erdogan neo-Ottoman sham, but the real thing) could be established, I believe that this region could actually encourage the right quality in those lands. But this requires that people who are willing to fight for that ideal would remain there and stand their ground against the colonialist interests of the West in their exploitation of that region.

“At this point I am actually more inclined to believe that those who are willing to stick things out in their homelands in spite of basically being turned into war zones by the West could be more likely individually to have more propensity towards nobility and idealism, as opposed to those who flee to a more comfortable and materialistic life in the Western nations. This is why I was considering that the United States which at this point seems to epitomise the materialistic, secular way of life, banning Muslims entry to their country, could actually act in our favour as far as encouraging nobility and quality.“

Honestly, I think it’s the exact opposite. I could argue that those who leave their country in a time of war are predominantly those who lack honorable character/are incapable of contributing (or don’t agree with its policies, but let’s look over that for now). That means only the noble and capable ones would remain, so if your goal is a Middle East comprised of more noble individuals, then letting the ignoble ones leave and go to the States/Europe is what you should want; not stopping them.

@Hypnotix – That could be true… But at the end of the day, I am in Australia. So really that is ultimately my jurisdiction. The Middle East is more my broader concern because I am Muslim, and so I have a broader scope as a member of the Ummah universally.

@Panda – I am not Handscar. That fact that you would even think that is pretty idiotic really. I assume that you saw the note when AS removed his swastika from me. This is National Socialist, and that was my previous philosophy, but now I am Muslim. So although I continue to have respect for Hitler and National Socialism, my philosophy has to be brought into line with my greater spiritual perspective.

“I think I know what you’re feeling; beware of blind fury is all I can add really… Good luck with your new project. Really liked the AFP website.”

It is comforting to know that you’re still around, my friend. In spite of my personal evolution, a journey which I don’t know exactly where the end will be, but I still remember our conversations in the past with fondness.

I’m still considering exactly what to do with the whole AFP thing. It was definitely a good website. My new project has a broader application. Abu Haydar is alongside with me in it, as well as some in Indonesia.

I’m still considering exactly what to do with the whole AFP thing. It was definitely a good website. My new project has a broader application.

This is interesting to me, since I followed a parallel but inverse path during the same time frame as you. For the life of me I have always had a heart for what National Socialism appeared to be to me. When I encountered this website many years back, I was ecstatic about finally finding what seemed to be the most accurate reflection of what National Socialism really was. However I was disaffected by some of the existential or Gnostic perspectives on the world. In my own state of depression, I saw this attitude as an attack on people who were similarly dealing with that, as an invitation to no longer resist those terrible feelings, and to embrace a nasty, self-destructive lifestyle.
There were other qualms I had with Aryanism.net, but they were minor, and sincere discussion, primarily with AS, was able to catalyze my reasoning on those subjects. As these minor issues were worked out, I was also embracing a recovery from depression. In this recovery, I clung to the beauties and miracles of life. I saw the world as a garden that had been condemned to thorn bushes and weeds, but with truly noble caretakers, it could flourish as a paradise. I saw the world as an orchestra, where the conductor had been imprisoned by thieves, and if only we could get the conductor back to his post, the world could be beautiful again. To this effect, I realized, by Aryanism.net’s definition, I was a Fascist.
With absolute exuberance, I returned to this website with the intention of being a loyal ally of it. I, a Fascist, whose sole conflict with National Socialism is the sought ending of material life and the material realm, could finally with peace contribute to the correcting of the world. Our differences would never have to be fought between us, it would instead be a conflict reserved for our children or grandchildren, as it should.
Unexpectedly, in a short amount of time beyond this resolution, I found myself sympathizing with this Gnostic-National-Socialist initiative. However, I soon learned it is inconsistent within me. One day I feel so, but upon the improvement of life, I have no such feelings anymore. It might be an inconsistency I will mentally and spiritually debate within myself for this entire life.
Nevertheless, I am left confused and critical of AS’s ranking of Islam above Fascism. Fascism can be based upon ideals, it can be the entirety of National Socialism without Gnosticism. It is an all encompassing national initiative. It is the radical individualism of empowerment and compassion for your citizens, your folk. It is the mindfulness of individual spirituality, because regardless of your religious denomination, you are an American.
As much as I respect Islam, it is flawed where Fascism is not. It is the subjugation of those who do not capitulate to spiritual tunnel vision. It’s ancient laws are devoid of the innovation and compassion required for the modern world. Islam views non-believers, despite their good will, as separate from the Ummah. Fascism can view any type of believers as inclusive, because of their good will.
Fascism is based upon selected ideals, so in theory, a Fascist state could be very ignoble, but a manifestation of Fascism could also be everything that Aryanism is, without it’s Gnostic edge. Therefore, Islam can not surpass a Fascism, in comparison with National Socialism.
Fascist or National Socialist – it makes no difference to me – because the sole qualm I have is already guaranteed to be dealt with far beyond my own lifetime.
Do your own qualms multiply, as mine dissolve?

You can find me on Instagram @the_gnostic_one
I am continuing the struggle there, as I really am not fond of any of the other social media platforms at this point. I will be platforming from IG to a website I am building. It will display my art, music, films, and my commentary on geo-political; and spiritual events and issues.

YOU IGNORE WHAT NATIONAL SOCIALISM, FASCISM, GNOSTICISM, AND NOBILITY, ARE; YOU DO NOT SEEM TO BE CAPABLE OF COMPREHENDING THEM, AND THE FACT THAT YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF AS A FASCIST —DESPITE YOUR IGNORANCE— IS NOT COINCIDENTAL.

@Legion – I watched that video you posted, and I found it interesting. Because he actually says, “Religion is social justice.” He is speaking against the wicked family of the House of Saud who exploits the Muslims in the name of them being a special family, which is completely contrary to the religion. “Who wants to establish Islam should distribute the Muslim’s money upon the Muslims.” This is essentially what the Zakat was established for, where those who had a certain level of income would give a percentage of that income to the Khaliph for distribution to the Khalifate’s poor citizens.

I’m passing this video on to some of my collaborators, as it will stimulate an interesting discussion, I think. I have heard my brothers talk about Saddam Hussein in a positive light, even though technically he was a Baathist socialist and seemingly secular. So I’m looking forward to see what they think of Nasser actually.

@Saifullah He also references the Muslim Brotherhood. More importantly he says that Socialism does not divide people, which your some collaborators appear to express as Islam. Reactionaries are afraid of losing their privileged caste. If one can not bear to be on equal terms as a Christian or a Buddhist, than he is not a Socialist. I see the Zakat as a very noble thing, however if it was implemented as law in my country, it would not serve me, or any other non-Muslim unless every Muslim had already taken his fill. I am privy to some of the very noble aspects of Islam, some of which are paralleled in Socialism, only differing in that they apply to the citizen.
Anyway, I’m glad my last post didn’t sour you. I feel compelled to express my thoughts and feelings, even if they are blunt, I believe it is better for the both of us if I speak; my intent is critical but not malicious.

@RY I am just a man. http://aryanism.net/politics/national-socialism-and-fascism/
I suggest you offer a correction to the points that I am missing. You would be a capricious fool to suggest to someone a lack of comprehension without at first offering insight. What is Nobility? A refusal to accept slavery. Without the material world, how do know we will be free? What if it is a necessary channel in order to acquire true freedom? And that by eliminating it, we condemn ourselves? I feel that I can not answer this because of the conditions of the world I was born into. That is why I seek to make a more noble world; for our inheritors to discover the answers I can not.

We must remember that at the end the Mahdi and the Christ are going to be allied together against the Dajjal. Ultimately Islam means submission to Allah, and seeing as this was the same message that all the Messengers, peace be upon them all, brought, then ultimately in the end all those who truly follow the Messengers will be united. The trouble is that over time, these messages have been corrupted and people have spawned their own religions from this.

As AS himself has said, your criticism that the Zakah only applies to citizens of the Ummah of faith is offset by the fact that anyone who acknowledges that there is no god worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad is His slave and messenger can be a citizen of the Ummah. And honestly, since it has been said that since the Prophet died and revelation ceased, people can only be judged according to the apparent, and so if people wanted to merely make this profession and then submit to the least requirements of the religion, they could not be considered anything other than a citizen of the Ummah. Then of course there are those who accept jizya and submit themselves to the State. They can even carry on their previous religion in private, just as long as they restrict themselves from communal expression of their faith.

@Legion:
“Nevertheless, I am left confused and critical of AS’s ranking of Islam above Fascism. ”

Fascism in itself strives for the unity, independence and power of the nation. The only imperative of a fascist state is to do what empowers the state and the nation. If it is not paired with some other beliefs that give it specific goals, it is merely will to power applied to the political sphere.
Islam has a spiritual and transcendental goal.

Fascism doesn’t have a consistent economic vision. It could even accept capitalism or communism, if it was deemed convenient. Communistic-like reforms were enacted in the RSI (Repubblica Sociale Italiana), and were rightfully despised by National Socialists.

I remember AS saying that Fascism implies autocracy. I do not fully agree with that. Mussolini even said that “Fascism is an autocracy on the road to democracy”. Ultimate power rested not on the Duce itself, but on the Grand Council of Fascism: in fact Mussolini was deposed by a motion of no confidence (something unthinkable in NS Germany).
I think the fascist vision of democracy is very similar to the soviet one: capitalistic democracy is not “real democracy”; only if the people are properly educated by the state, and not manipulated by other forces, you have a “real democracy”.
Some fascist ideologues said that their goal was a “corporativist democracy”, and to reach that goal it was necessary to build an “ethical state”(philosophical term of Giovanni Gentile) to re-educate italians and give shape to a “New (italian) Man”.

“As much as I respect Islam, it is flawed where Fascism is not. It is the subjugation of those who do not capitulate to spiritual tunnel vision. It’s ancient laws are devoid of the innovation and compassion required for the modern world. Islam views non-believers, despite their good will, as separate from the Ummah. Fascism can view any type of believers as inclusive, because of their good will.”

And how does fascism view those who do not believe in fascism? It’s the same thing.
The important thing is that they are universalist ideologies and accept anyone sincerely willing to join, regardless of their origin.

“I saw the world as a garden that had been condemned to thorn bushes and weeds, but with truly noble caretakers, it could flourish as a paradise.”

When I was a child, I was horrified when my parents pulled out “weeds” from the garden. I tried to tell them not to, and got scolded for it. I despise the term “weed” about as much as I despise the term “non-white”. My parents told me not to water “weeds” when watering plants, but of course I watered them anyway. I dreamed of a garden where so-called “weeds” would be allowed to stay just like other plants, or more accurately, where the very concept of “weeds” would not even exist.

(As a matter of fact, I aesthetically preferred of many of these “weeds” over the ornamental plants because the former’s flowers were much smaller (ie. less sexualized).)

“I saw the world as an orchestra, where the conductor had been imprisoned by thieves, and if only we could get the conductor back to his post, the world could be beautiful again.”

OK, but what kind of music should the orchestra play? Music to make people forget that they never chose to be born, or music to remind people of this?

“I am left confused and critical of AS’s ranking of Islam above Fascism.”

Islam believes in the Last Day. Fascism does not. Hence the Islamic conductor would be more respectful of the score than the fascist conductor, to use your analogy.

“Without the material world, how do know we will be free? What if it is a necessary channel in order to acquire true freedom? And that by eliminating it, we condemn ourselves?”

You could argue for keeping every type of evil using identical reasoning. What if Israel is a necessary channel in order to acquire true freedom? And that by eliminating Israel, we condemn ourselves?

You are still confusing freedom with liberty. You imagine freedom to be something that we obtain AFTER eliminating the material world. No, freedom IS eliminating the material world. Freedom is to be unafraid of condemning ourselves.

freedom is the willingness to face any and all possible negative consequences for one’s actions, for only in such a state of mind is one prepared to act in opposition to the slavemaster without reservation or constraint.

“That is why I seek to make a more noble world; for our inheritors to discover the answers I can not.”

And your inheritors could do the same procrastination for the same reason, and so every generation will pass the problem to the next generation, and nothing will ever get solved, while the number of victims of birth continues to accumulate just to keep the generations going. If this perpetual procrastination is acceptable to you, can you really say you refuse to accept slavery?

@MS

I have added your Mussolini quote about democracy to the main site. Thanks for your input!

Someone was just telling me that recently many high schools in my area staged a walk-out on inauguration day, and then walked over to the one high school that didn’t and got into an altercation, several teachers were punched apparently.

I think the Mussolini quote is null, not only because of the context and his audience, but because of also a choice to define the word differently. Similarly, I quote Hitler: “The result of the revolution in Germany has been to establish a democracy”

As for the garden metaphor, I don’t even consider growing plants that have no food or practical value. However, weeds will choke out your crops and drain the nutrients from the soil that could have gone to your potential harvest.

Israel is a direct threat to our freedom. The material world, however, can be molded.http://aryanism.net/culture/aryan-race/
What is the point of cultivating this race when we can skip to the endgame?
Freedom is wholeheartedly defiance, yet we seek to breed a folk that is more compliant with a compassionate lifestyle?
If a choice came to accepting the material world as it is now, or a heroic battle that would inevitably result in the elimination of it entirely, I would choose the latter. However, if we defeat our enemies and survive, than why should we not take the opportunity to cultivate this race and existence? Furthermore, why should we not take that opportunity to discover the entirety of this realm, and how it functions on every micro and macro level? Wouldn’t our mastery of it, be a necessary piece to universal transcendence? I don’t think we should leave without uncovering all the mysteries within it.

According to your logic, if everything else noble were to be striven for, then it would be our Aryan inheritor’s natural instinct to eliminate the material world; thus perpetual procrastination would never occur.
I have been an agnostic my entire life; the only thing I have faith in is a potential (Aryan) future generation’s ability to make this decision. Unless every corner of this realm has been uncovered, I can not. Perhaps this is because I am not in tune with my own spirituality, I don’t know. It seems to me there is an element of faith you must have to hold this perspective.

Moreover, crop yield would not be something we would even have to worry about if population were sufficiently reduced.

“The material world, however, can be molded.”

The greatest danger is to mold it until it becomes so comfortable we no longer want to leave.

“What is the point of cultivating this race when we can skip to the endgame?”

We need a demographic of uniformly reliable endgame players first.

“Freedom is wholeheartedly defiance, yet we seek to breed a folk that is more compliant with a compassionate lifestyle?”

No, to “comply” is to accept something different from our original condition. Compassion is part of Original Nobility, therefore a compassionate lifestyle requires no compliance.

“However, if we defeat our enemies and survive, than why should we not take the opportunity to cultivate this race and existence?”

Because we then would become the very people we previously set out to defeat. Boromir Syndrome warning! (“Let’s use the Ring for ourselves!”)

“Furthermore, why should we not take that opportunity to discover the entirety of this realm, and how it functions on every micro and macro level?”

Because the longer we stay around and the more we spread out, the more chances for the corruption to start all over again. Boromir Syndrome warning! (“Let’s study the Ring and learn how it works!”)

“Wouldn’t our mastery of it, be a necessary piece to universal transcendence? I don’t think we should leave without uncovering all the mysteries within it.”

That is what Boromir would say about the Ring.

“According to your logic, if everything else noble were to be striven for, then it would be our Aryan inheritor’s natural instinct to eliminate the material world; thus perpetual procrastination would never occur.”

But if a procrastinator were placed in charge, the concept of nobility would be corrupted long before the breeding of such an inheritor is complete.

“Unless every corner of this realm has been uncovered, I can not.”

Then you never will, because you could always imagine more possible corners. You would become like the insect phobia guy:

All indefinite hypotheses are enslaving because their potential for confirmation is never exhausted by a finite number of tests returning null results. You become like those people with severe insect phobias who spend all their time searching for insects inside their house. No amount of searching and failure to find insects will convince them that there are no more insects in their house, because they cannot check every spot in their house at the same time and so they merely insist that the “insects they HAVEN’T FOUND” (see the problem with this construct?) are hiding somewhere else than where they are at each moment. They are trapped inside the unfalsifiability of their own hypothesis.

and thanked him for. I also let him know that we currently promote PACPO, and suggested that he himself consider joining PACPO. He has not yet replied. So it’s up to him. The only US organization we endorse is PACPO, so even if hypothetically JAM were to ressurect the OWNP today, I would only endorse him if Lucius were to first decide to merge PACPO with the OWNP.